prateeko

Cam22

This shirt is hilarious and has so much emotion. I didn't get it until I looked at the dino on the right. He's like "Ahh $#@%!!!". Too funny. Great design. Those little dinosaurs are trying their best to hide.

bpr2

houseman

haven't decided yet. i like it. i know that. i'm just bugged by the question "why are these 5 soon to be toasted dinosaurs stuck on this tiny island"

without the fear in the one on the right..substitute a 'beach' theme ...and u got one with his head in the sand.. one takin a nap under an umbrella .. maybe an angry dad dino tired of listening to one of the skinny ones.. i duno.

ztfreep

nivmizzet wrote:Yeah, it was the dinosaur on the right that sold it for me.

Why? What does he/she/or it see to cause such an expression?

Nope. This design simply doesn't sell itself on the basis of what the "danger" is -- and THAT is presuming that there is SOME sort of danger threatening. [to those who would argue that it has something to do with a large space object about to hit the earth, my next question comes up in the form of: how could an ecosystem of those four animals live on an island that small?] Again, nope: I've got no clue whatsoever as to the possible "danger" nor do I see anything anywhere in the design that even faintly identifies it.

Perhaps it is a "cute" design, but as has been recently noted quite strongly lately, (a) there have been far too many "cute" designs and (b) "cute" designs are not worth purchasing merely because they are "cute".

Lemme write one thing about "dangers": if it has never happened before, how have you learned about it being a danger? If it is the danger that no doubt some in this discussion are presupposing, how did these dinosaurs survive it and thus are able to recognize it now? Plain old incompatibility of concepts reigns supreme.

I'd also like to point out that in nearly every movie I've ever seen (why am I thinking of "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" right now?) the only time you see someone with a newspaper over their head is in a futile effort to ward off rain.

Is the danger rain? For that matter (and at this point I'm being snarky), where did they get the newspapers?

ztfreep

Oh yeah - is the t-rex supposedly swimming up to the island or something? Also, at the time there were dinosaurs, there were no people: the dominant mammalian life-form was supposed to look something like an oversized rat or shrew and lived in trees. I don't think these dinosaurs have to worry about anything they could stomp without noticing.

jknation

ztfreep wrote:Why? What does he/she/or it see to cause such an expression?

Nope. This design simply doesn't sell itself on the basis of what the "danger" is -- and THAT is presuming that there is SOME sort of danger threatening. [to those who would argue that it has something to do with a large space object about to hit the earth, my next question comes up in the form of: how could an ecosystem of those four animals live on an island that small?] Again, nope: I've got no clue whatsoever as to the possible "danger" nor do I see anything anywhere in the design that even faintly identifies it.

Perhaps it is a "cute" design, but as has been recently noted quite strongly lately, (a) there have been far too many "cute" designs and (b) "cute" designs are not worth purchasing merely because they are "cute".

Lemme write one thing about "dangers": if it has never happened before, how have you learned about it being a danger? If it is the danger that no doubt some in this discussion are presupposing, how did these dinosaurs survive it and thus are able to recognize it now? Plain old incompatibility of concepts reigns supreme.

I'd also like to point out that in nearly every movie I've ever seen (why am I thinking of "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" right now?) the only time you see someone with a newspaper over their head is in a futile effort to ward off rain.

Is the danger rain? For that matter (and at this point I'm being snarky), where did they get the newspapers?

Another item added to my "Don't Buy" list.

It's just a shirt. People don't generally start to analyze their shirts.( Maybe you do) It's just a good design that people like. Nothing more. You don't have buy it if you don't like it but that doesn't mean you should tell ( I guess you can, but why?) in great detail as to why you are not going to buy this shirt.. why, are you jealous that you can't design a such good shirt?

idroodit

ztfreep wrote:Why? What does he/she/or it see to cause such an expression?

how could an ecosystem of those four animals live on an island that small?] Again, nope: I've got no clue whatsoever as to the possible "danger" nor do I see anything anywhere in the design that even faintly identifies it.

See, thats because stupid people can't understand whats not said or whats not show. See I could call you a ******bag and you'd scratch your head in confussion while the rest of us would get it. For someone thats trying to sound so smart about ecosystems of some cartoon characters you sure act like everything needs to be handed to you on a plate to GET IT.

ztfreep wrote:Perhaps it is a "cute" design, but as has been recently noted quite strongly lately, (a) there have been far too many "cute" designs and (b) "cute" designs are not worth purchasing merely because they are "cute".

And I'VE noticed, myself included, that there are too many A.Holes around here that seem to know everything but never deliver their own masterpiece.

ztfreep wrote: how did these dinosaurs survive it and thus are able to recognize it now?

ztfreep

auggie24 wrote:I think they're cowering in fear of the tax-man. Imagine the penalites for 4,000,000 years of non-payment.

WOW! nothing like getting it wrong two different ways at once. First off, let's look at (from Wikipedia):

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The presidential election of 1912 was contested between three advocates of an income tax. On February 25, 1913, the Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that the amendment had been ratified by the necessary three-fourths of the states, and thus had become part of the Constitution. An income tax, the Revenue Act of 1913, was shortly passed by the Congress.

"4,000,000 years of non-payment"? How can you possibly "not pay for 4,000,000" when the Revenue Act hadn't even been passed by Congress for 4,000,000 years afterward??

Secondly, income tax is based on INCOME, isn't it? Do you mine telling me exactly what income these dinosaurs were earning?

idroodit

ztfreep wrote:WOW! nothing like getting it wrong two different ways at once. First off, let's look at (from Wikipedia):

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The presidential election of 1912 was contested between three advocates of an income tax. On February 25, 1913, the Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that the amendment had been ratified by the necessary three-fourths of the states, and thus had become part of the Constitution. An income tax, the Revenue Act of 1913, was shortly passed by the Congress.

"4,000,000 years of non-payment"? How can you possibly "not pay for 4,000,000" when the Revenue Act hadn't even been passed by Congress for 4,000,000 years afterward??

Secondly, income tax is based on INCOME, isn't it? Do you mine telling me exactly what income these dinosaurs were earning?

WOW... Bravo on not enjoying anything ever because every single fiber of a plot isn't perfectly in place or every word isn't properly spelled. You've just made everyone very impressed I'm sure.

fifteensmiles

ztfreep wrote:WOW! nothing like getting it wrong two different ways at once. First off, let's look at (from Wikipedia):

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The presidential election of 1912 was contested between three advocates of an income tax. On February 25, 1913, the Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that the amendment had been ratified by the necessary three-fourths of the states, and thus had become part of the Constitution. An income tax, the Revenue Act of 1913, was shortly passed by the Congress.

"4,000,000 years of non-payment"? How can you possibly "not pay for 4,000,000" when the Revenue Act hadn't even been passed by Congress for 4,000,000 years afterward??

Secondly, income tax is based on INCOME, isn't it? Do you mine telling me exactly what income these dinosaurs were earning?

.... yeah, I'm not a big fan of the design either, but you have got to stop taking everything so seriously.

jknation

ztfreep wrote:WOW! nothing like getting it wrong two different ways at once. First off, let's look at (from Wikipedia):

Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The presidential election of 1912 was contested between three advocates of an income tax. On February 25, 1913, the Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that the amendment had been ratified by the necessary three-fourths of the states, and thus had become part of the Constitution. An income tax, the Revenue Act of 1913, was shortly passed by the Congress.

"4,000,000 years of non-payment"? How can you possibly "not pay for 4,000,000" when the Revenue Act hadn't even been passed by Congress for 4,000,000 years afterward??

Secondly, income tax is based on INCOME, isn't it? Do you mine telling me exactly what income these dinosaurs were earning?

I really could not help but comment on this matter.. First off, what makes you think that those dinosaurs were in US? (and you really can't or can prove that they didn't have tax back then) BUT it's not about that, he is trying to be funny. making a joke? get it? that's why he said "imagine if ..." and dinosaurs hiding w/ newspaper is suppose to be comical. do you know what that is? i think not.

bpr2

idroodit wrote:WOW... Bravo on not enjoying anything ever because every single fiber of a plot isn't perfectly in place or every word isn't properly spelled. You've just made everyone very impressed I'm sure.

ztfreep

And once again, a huge list of ad-hominem attacks as given by someone whose grasp of rhetoric is about as stable as their ability to hold onto the contents of a broken egg. Yeah, I think that reads about as well as any other metaphor that supports this t-shirt as being "funny".

Folks, I'm really not commenting about the shirt in almost ANY of my postings.

Have you, by any chance, noticed that?

Primarily I'm pointing out the inane and fatuous arguments y'all are using to support either other people's previous postings or their own.

If you wish to adore this t-shirt, use as many credit cards and PayPal accounts as you can to buy multiples of three. "Each to their own taste" as the old translation goes.

ChokingOutTheRadio

ztfreep wrote:Why? What does he/she/or it see to cause such an expression?

Nope. This design simply doesn't sell itself on the basis of what the "danger" is -- and THAT is presuming that there is SOME sort of danger threatening. [to those who would argue that it has something to do with a large space object about to hit the earth, my next question comes up in the form of: how could an ecosystem of those four animals live on an island that small?] Again, nope: I've got no clue whatsoever as to the possible "danger" nor do I see anything anywhere in the design that even faintly identifies it.

Perhaps it is a "cute" design, but as has been recently noted quite strongly lately, (a) there have been far too many "cute" designs and (b) "cute" designs are not worth purchasing merely because they are "cute".

Lemme write one thing about "dangers": if it has never happened before, how have you learned about it being a danger? If it is the danger that no doubt some in this discussion are presupposing, how did these dinosaurs survive it and thus are able to recognize it now? Plain old incompatibility of concepts reigns supreme.

I'd also like to point out that in nearly every movie I've ever seen (why am I thinking of "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" right now?) the only time you see someone with a newspaper over their head is in a futile effort to ward off rain.

Is the danger rain? For that matter (and at this point I'm being snarky), where did they get the newspapers?

Another item added to my "Don't Buy" list.

Wow...another person added to my "Needs to Get Out More" list.

edit: i guess if you've been facetious this whole time then my comment isn't applicable. I'm a writer also and sometimes when writing satire you have to realize the audience isn't in tune with your stream of thought and it takes some hints to edge them towards that conclusion.

ztfreep

Gosh. Went out today, bought some stuff at the hardware store, flirted with both of the female clerks (I'm male), went over to RatShack just for fun (they didn't have anything I wanted or was inexpensive enough to buy), went over to a bookstore, bought some silly toys for a youngster in my family, got a foot-long at Subways, drove home, watched "Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog" with my GF (she said it was the best movie she's seen on DVD this month), mucked with a little bit of email and finally got over here to see if either the primary woot! was worth anything (nope) or if the shirt.woot! brought a grin or chuckle.

The t-shirt didn't. All of you folks have, though. And I thank you all for it.

Woot.com is operated by Woot Services LLC.
Products on Woot.com are sold by Woot, Inc., other than items on Wine.Woot which are sold by the seller specified on the product detail page.
Product narratives are for entertainment purposes and frequently employ
literary point of view;
the narratives do not express Woot's editorial opinion.
Aside from literary abuse, your use of this site also subjects you to Woot's
terms of use
and
privacy policy.
Woot may designate a user comment as a Quality Post, but that doesn't mean we agree with or guarantee anything said or linked to in that post.